How Local Governments Hinder Our Response to Natural Disasters

Read this article: "How Local Governments Hinder Our Response to Natural Disasters" by Mr. David Wachsmuth; it could potentially be construed as heresy in some circles, but there is also a degree of truth in the observations he makes. Wachsmuth looks at the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy and talks about how the Mayor's office usurped the power to lead following landfall favoring improvisation instead of the plans the OEM had created.

One of the more interesting takeaways from the article is this:

"Collaborations need to be achievable to be useful. The sociologist Lee Clarke argues that disaster plans are "fantasy documents"—tools for building trust in an organization rather than actual, implementable plans. This was certainly true in the response to Sandy. More modest plans, which take account of political realities and power relations, are more likely to be useful than comprehensive but unachievable fantasy documents." 

A lot of time, effort, and money goes into disaster planning and yet I've seen firsthand, as I'm sure many of you have as well, the ad hoc nature of response environments. Even when the best curated plans are exercised ad nauseam, challenges remain. This is not to say that planning can account for every facet of a disaster, but it would seem that two opposing forces are being pushed simultaneously, the need for rigidity in planning that ICS and the command and control mentality require, and the push for greater community involvement to build resilience and self-reliance. 

How do you reconcile the rigidity that is often seen in municipal planning with the inherent ad hoc nature of grassroots community response? What does that look like in a plan for a city? As it stands many plans don't account for emergent response activities but with the role Occupy Sandy played following Sandy, that will hopefully change.

If the idea that the Mayor's office totally disregarded OEM's plans seems crazy...you can read about how Michael Brown, (you may remember him as "brownie"), disregarded the newly minted National Response Plan following Hurricane Katrina...plan-averse public officials it seems, are nothing new.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/15/AR2006031502320.html

Housing in Humanitarian Crises

Providing interim / transitional shelter post-disaster is a challenge, one where the demands for materials often outweigh the local supply. In unique circumstances, like the case of the tsunami that hit American Samoa in 2009, there wasn't enough building material on the island to address the shelter needs of the impacted communities. And while ordering more wasn't a problem, the multi-week lag from order to delivery due to American Samoa's unique geography, caused significant delays in getting people back into their homes. The point being that providing shelter following an event remains one of the greatest challenges to those in response and recovery, regardless of how straight-forward it may seem.

While the idiosyncrasies that affected the speed of recovery in American Samoa are unique to its geography, the challenges shelter represents post-disaster are not. Finding a shelter solution that's cheap, readily available, culturally appropriate, easy to put together, durable, can quickly be distributed, and can withstand the elements, are only a small set of obstacles that need to be overcome when figuring out how to get people out of camps and back to their communities.

The pressure to quickly implement a solution coupled with an organizational need to be "doing" while creating "impact," are part of the reason some shelter solutions fall short of their intended goals. A great example of this was witnessed when an International NGO implemented a shelter program in Haiti in 2010/2011. Shelters were distributed throughout the community but rarely used because they had no ventilation, the tarp walls provided no security, and they didn't come with doors. What seemed like a slam dunk on paper failed to gain any traction with the people it was intended to help.

Due to the host of requirements structures need to fulfill, hitting the mark can be exceedingly difficult when it comes to shelter following an event. That doesn't mean however that there isn't a shortage of innovative ideas that try to meet as many of the requirements as possible.

One such idea belongs to the I-BEAM architecture and design, with their pallet structure concept:

http://i-beamdesign.com/projects/refugee/refugee.html

While a great many challenges stand in the way of this concept making it to the front lines, it's one of
the ideas that I find interesting. For case studies on shelter designs following conflict and natural disaster check out: Sheltercasestudies.org, a great resource for examining a wealth of case history regarding shelter in dynamic environments.

While the magic shelter bullet remains an elusive ideal that many organizations covet, there isn't a shortfall of innovative ideas to spur the next round of implementation...if concept design intrigues you, I would suggest looking into Architecture for humanity and their book Design like you Give a Damn, where you will find no shortage of unique perspectives on post-disaster housing solutions.

http://designlikeyougiveadamn.architectureforhumanity.org/

Resilient Communities Training

The RAND Corporation is a think tank that covers a wide range of initiatives including a center focused on Catastrophic Risk Management and Compensation. Essentially there are a lot of smart people thinking about and writing about resilience and other topics related to disasters, similar to the conceptual focus and outputs of the Commons Lab at the Wilson Center. Interesting reading when you've got the time...but with the Holidays, who has any to spare?

I did, sort of. When perusing the RAND site for gift ideas I came upon an online training that covers some foundational elements and best practices associated with building resilient communities. After spending about 5-10 mins clicking, I believe the RAND resilience training to be worthwhile as a primer for those looking for resources to share on resilience both from an individual/household as well as an organizational perspective. A great idea for that emergency manager or community-based nonprofit visionary looking to take the bull by the horns.

If you give it a look, I would be interested in any feedback as I'm pulling together resources for a training I'm putting together.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL109.html

Act Now, Save Later

In my last post I quoted a figure that for every $1 spent on preparedness, $5 would be saved in recovery. In exploring this simple yet profound relationship that so clearly illustrates the value of investing in preparedness, I came across a campaign recently launched by UNDP called "Act Now, Save Later."

The campaign cites startling statistics in an effort to raise awareness around the economic and human costs of disasters. 



UNDP's strong focus on preparedness is further reinforced by their involvement in advancing the Millennium Development Goals. The below report was released in 2010 and details the impacts disasters are having in both economic terms and the ability of the international development community to meet the 2015 deadline set for the MDGs.

While the focus on preparedness is nothing new, the reporting done and economic benefits outlined reinforce the need for continued focus from both the international and domestic aid communities. 

http://www.adpc.net/v2007/downloads/2010/oct/mdgproofing.pdf

The Future of Long Term Recovery

Last week marked the 1 year anniversary of Hurricane Sandy making landfall in the mid-Atlantic region. These large scale events offer an opportunity that many communities aren't afforded, an exact quantification of progress, a cataloguing of what's been done, and a questioning of what has not. Many smaller events, like the flooding in Texas or the recent blizzard in North Dakota are examples of disasters that strike, but that won't necessarily be revisited by our collective consciousness--they are blips that quickly fade into the noise of the 24 hour news cycle. While larger events like: the Haiti Earthquake, Hurricane Katrina, and the Japanese Earthquake/Tsunami too will fade in time, their anniversaries are opportunities to refocus attention at the less straightforward side of disasters--Long Term Recovery.

Long Term Recovery as a topic for general discussion is one that doesn't get much attention even though it's a process that all communities impacted by an event must go through; partially because Long Term Recovery (LTR) isn't sexy, but more because it's incredibly intricate and difficult to distill into easily digestible stories. Last week there were countless articles asking why more hasn't been done, and whether the progress that has been made is the right direction to be headed in. And while it's great that attention is being paid to the recovery of communities that have largely fallen out of the spotlight, I'm not convinced that it's a viable way to impact the national dialogue on improving what's being done.

Recovery Continuum, NDRF: http://www.fema.gov/pdf/recoveryframework/ndrf.pdf

And therein lies the challenge--how do you change the recovery paradigm? How do you impact what's being done? In the world of response, both short term and intermediate, the loop from start to finish is anywhere from a few weeks to a few months. This quick lifecycle makes it easier to try new things and track their relative success or failure. With Long Term Recovery, the identification of best practices and the integration of their revisions are different because LTR operates on timelines measured in years, not months. In addition to LTR's duration, there is no clearly identified "finish" line, what a completed recovery for one community looks like may not necessarily coincide with that of another. This discrepancy creates additional challenges when trying to compare the impacts of programming carried over from one LTR response to another.

In recognition of these challenges, FEMA issued a report spanning 7 years of Long Term Recovery, from 2004-2011. This report was created in an effort to provide guidance and a baseline from which to codify best practices implemented during the LTR timeframe. While shorter than many federal documents, clocking in at 69 pages, it's a long read that can be difficult to dig into if you're not a) interested in the subject or b) in the midst of navigating LTR.

So, LTR is tough to improve upon because it operates on a timeline that makes reviewing successful best practices and evolving them difficult, and the federal reporting to aid in that process isn't written for the audience it would benefit the most. So the question remains...how do you influence Long Term Recovery?

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/rebuild/ltrc/2011_report.pdf

The best way to positively influence the recovery paradigm is to take the nuggets of wisdom compiled from previous events and integrate them into preparedness planning and frameworks (I realize that isn't groundbreaking). In working with communities that have gone through the paces of early recovery and are faced with the dramatic slowing of progress as LTR gets off the ground, people have generally said the same thing, that they wish they knew then what they know now. While papers have been written on the challenges of creating preparedness messaging that resonates with communities that creates action, the disconnect that exists between words and action in this realm is surprising given the facts:

• Survivors have communicated that they wish they knew what to expect during response and recovery
• There is a federal focus on building resilience involving the whole of community
• By investing $1 in preparedness, $5 is saved in recovery
• The trend in major events causing billions in damages is increasing
• A Climate Change Executive Order calling for federal agencies and local governments to include the impacts of climate change into their planning for future projects was just issued

In light of the above information and the fact that it's nothing many of us haven't been aware of for some time, why is making progress in the one area of the disaster lifecycle where it matters most, seemingly impossible? With so many organizations and state agencies out there who focus on building community resilience as a part of their mission, coupled with the availability of federal funding and the beginnings of a call for elected officials to become better versed in the language of emergency response, who would've thought that gaining ground in this area would be such a fight?

Nonprofit response and recovery plays catch up, always starting after the event has done the damage. Any efficiencies gained on the reactive side of the disaster spectrum would be welcome, but I believe there is near universal agreement that the opportunities exist within the realm of preparedness. So if history has illustrated the need, science tells us that the future is going to bring more of the same or worse, math backs up the economics of investing in preparedness, and the government has said that the focus should be on building community resilience--what exactly is holding things up?

The future of LTR doesn't exist in a new program or refinement of its model. The future exists in finding the political will to fund what we already know, and give communities a chance to implement changes before the articles written commemorating the next event that irrevocably altered the fabric of a community, are about them.

Shock Troops of Disaster

While I finish the last piece in the Sandy Anniversary Trilogy, I thought I would share a 10 minute video on the impacts of the Long Island Express Hurricane of 1938. There's lots of great footage of the storm's impacts and how a region recovered before there was National VOAD, FEMA, or NOAA. While essentially a WPA promotional video, it does a great job of capturing some of the tremendous impacts the hurricane had on communities across Long Island and New England.

https://archive.org/details/ShockTro1938

Nonprofits and Long Term Recovery

Volunteers and nonprofit organizations have an undeniable impact on expediting a community's recovery in a post-disaster timeframe. The depth of experience and resource brought to bear by voluntary organizations can have a significant impact on the speed at which recovery progresses in communities on the mend. Volunteers and the nonprofit organizations that exist to support their activities are cornerstones of recovery efforts; from cooking and distributing meals and doing the physical work of mucking, gutting, and debris removal, to disaster case management and repair and rebuild work, nonprofit resources provide continuity as a community transitions from response into long-term recovery (LTR). Key to leveraging those resources however, comes with better understanding the types of challenges nonprofits face in sustaining LTR efforts.

Before looking at these unique challenges, one needs to understand the role nonprofits have as recovery plays out. To put it simply, they are the one's who provide the resource: human, material, financial, and experiential that guide and drive the long-term recovery process. In partnership with residents and local officials, nonprofits can be a wealth of insight to help steer Long Term Recovery Committees. And yet, even with all the responsibility that falls to local and national nonprofits to advocate and move the needle in a positive direction day after day, there are challenges. Because nonprofits rely on the goodwill of the communities they serve, after a point in time as a community tries to re-establish a new normal, some of that goodwill can be eroded.

1. Progress is powered by people. Response is dominated by the spontaneity of volunteers proactively addressing unmet community needs. What usually starts as an overwhelming crush of interest quickly dwindles. Because nonprofits rely on a volunteers, their ability to sustain operations 6-12 months down the road can be compromised when the flow of volunteers has been reduced to a trickle. The changing seasons, competition for people's time, and a lack of media attention highlighting the needs can make generating interest a challenge. When nonprofits don't have a consistent workforce it causes delays in returning people to their homes.
2. You've gotta have skills. One of the reasons so many people get involved in early recovery activities is because many of the problems that need solving require hands--lots of hands. However, when it comes to replacing floor joists, installing subfloors, hanging sheetrock, or mudding and taping, the number of hands needed drops drastically, and the hands you do need have to know what they're doing. Given that getting general volunteers is challenging, getting one's who could conceivably be getting paid for doing the same thing is even more difficult. Nonprofits need skills, the more volunteers with construction-related skills means helping more people on a shorter timeline.
3. Vetting the need. One of the biggest departures from early recovery work that is central to long term recovery is being able to vet need. With so many pots of money that homeowners can apply for in addition to Federal dollars and any insurance money they may have received, doing the homework to understand a homeowners financial situation is key. Ensuring that those who are being helped with voluntary resources aren't able to afford a contractor is central to maintaining the integrity of long term recovery and to keeping the peace within the community. Communities with high concentrations of people who work in the trades (contractors, etc) raise concerns that nonprofits can "steal" potential work. Being able to confidently say that the homes nonprofits work on don't have the financial means to afford a professional contractor is important, however collecting the necessary information to say that takes time.
4. Housing. While nonprofits work to put roofs back over the heads of individuals and families who lost them, there is a concern that they themselves may not have a place to live. As normalcy returns, one of the costs that becomes less palatable is having an organization reside your basement or annex building. During the response phase, civic organizations and the faith-based community are all too happy to help bring resources in, but what worked in the weeks following the event can create challenges when host sites want their space back to resume their full scope of programming months down the road.

In our society of instant gratification where faster and more efficient are the order of the day things, even as complex and involved as rebuilding neighborhoods, take "too" long because they operate on a timeline and scale outside everyday expectations. Unless a community has had the unfortunate luck of suffering through multiple events in a short period of time, residents have no frame of reference to create a shared understanding of what recovery means for them beyond what is reported in the media. Given the challenges associated with getting the public to take initial steps in personal preparedness, trying to educate them about the nuance of long-term recovery would be time wasted. However, I believe that city officials and cadres of local civic leaders should be educated on timelines and long term recovery expectations because they are the one's who will ultimately be leading these efforts when the time comes.

In 2012 there were 112 federally declared disasters, in 2013 there have been 90 so far. Each of those events encompasses multiple communities, communities going through the same process and experiencing the same frustrations as those recovering from Sandy. One would think that given how often the model of Long Term Recovery is employed that it would be perfected, and you would be incorrect. While there are commonalities in recovery that apply to all communities and disasters, because each community has different needs, priorities, people, and a vision for how they want to rebuild, means that each recovery will be different. Like everything about disasters, nothing is easy, but thankfully there are nonprofits who continue to work in partnership with communities to ensure that those who need help can get it. 

Human Resilience

Source: Sethdcohen.com

We talk about a community’s ability to cope with and recover from disasters in terms of resilience, but for the most part fail to extend the definition to include how to better mentally and emotionally prepare the people who will be affected. Disaster impacts are quantified by physical damage done to homes, infrastructure, and the total economic losses that result. While these factors are central in determining the severity of an event, it’s a sterile way of classifying the scope of something that exacts a heavy human toll.

According to a Gallup poll, the clinical diagnosis of depression in zip codes heavily affected by Sandy increased by 25% in the weeks following the storm. This coming at a time when Health and Human Service organizations that remained operational were stretched thin and left to deal with the overwhelming number of storm-related needs. What the poll didn’t measure were the number of individuals who were on medications for a pre-existing mental illness that stopped taking them due to facilities being taken off line, medication being lost in the storm, or not being able to contact their case worker due to lack of power, public transportation outages, and an absence of reliable information. 

In addition to the challenges posed by a lack of medications and reliable information, many substance abuse clinics worried/worry about the rise in abuse and relapses as a result of Sandy-related stresses. But the worry extends beyond substance and drug abuse, PTSD in adults and children, acute stress-related behaviors, flashbacks, hoarding, and a host of other personal mental issues continue to plague the survivors in their ability to recover. 

While organizations like the Staten Island Mental Health Society, Long Island Mental Health Services, and other nonprofit human service organizations have setup support groups, free crisis counseling, and other Sandy-related programming, the scale of the ongoing trauma point to an area needing urgent attention, understanding, and additional resources to adequately ensure support is there for those who need it. 

The greatest challenge facing those who preach preparedness is that there is no way for a person to understand how they will react in the face of an event until they're faced with an event. Training can help, but for the average person, training isn't realistic. Up to this point, check lists like the one put out by the American Psychological Association, the Disaster Distress Hotline, self care, and having a strong network of friends and family have been the promoted best practices to help individuals prepare for post-event psychological trauma. To enhance our knowledge of the short and long term psychological affects natural disasters have on people, the Feinstein Institute was recently awarded a $600,000 grant from the CDC. Over the next 2 years, a study will be conducted aimed at deepening our understanding of how to better prepare people to cope with the impacts of natural weather events that are forecast to become more common. 

As a stronger emphasis is placed on whole of community response, stronger advocacy will be needed to ensure that human resilience is made a key value and takeaway as a result of Superstorm Sandy. While building codes can uniformly address needed changes to how we protect ourselves, and flood maps will tell us how high to build, resilience in people is a far more dynamic and individualistic challenge, one that will require ongoing thought and resource to ensure that the communities we're working to make stronger can weather the next storm.

The Great Shakeout

On Oct 17th almost 18 million people will participate in one of the largest organized annual preparedness events in the US, the Great Shakeout.

India's well coordinated preparedness and aggressive early recovery cleanup illustrates the power of having plans and how exercising those plans can reduce the loss of life and minimize confusion around roles and responsibilities in the aftermath of an event. The Great Shakeout is an opportunity to spend some time thinking through the "what if's" of an earthquake. It's a chance to take an honest look at your kit (if you have one) and figure out what still needs to be added, as well as going over the plan: where to meet and when, collecting copies of important documents, etc... I'm convinced that one of the main reasons people ignore preparedness is because it's uncomfortable to think about so it's pushed from our minds. This delay only works against our best interests when an earthquake strikes. While the event gives individuals a chance to take stock, it's also an opportunity for municipalities to go over their planning and think through how preparedness can be better messaged and what response and recovery will look like between local and state partners, etc...

The Shakeout is an opportunity to ask the "stupid" questions, to figure out what you'll do, and take some time to learn about what your village, city, or town plans to do to help minimize loss of life and property.

Are you in an area where there is the risk of and Earthquake? Are you ready? www.shakeout.org

International Day for Disaster Risk Reduction

This Sunday, October 13th, marks International Disaster Risk Reduction Day. This year's theme focuses on 'Individuals with Disabilities and Disasters.' Given the approximately 1 billion people around the world that live with some form of disability, talking about how to better incorporate and account for them in the planning process is a critical and often overlooked aspect of disaster preparedness.

It's surprising that given the focus on building resilience at a local level as a means of reducing a community's dependence on outside resources following an event, that accounting for people with disabilities within community preparedness, or disaster risk reduction is not talked about more.

A recent example of this was the number of the aging population and individuals with mobility challenges stuck in high rises throughout the metro New York City area following Sandy. No plans were in place to ensure wellness checks were conducted or that needed food, medication, etc. would get to those who needed it. The result was an undisclosed number of people stuck without food, water, power, medications, or information about what was happening and few people realizing it. This oversight became life threatening when temperatures dropped and a nor'easter blew through Metro NYC on Nov 7th.

Help raise awareness around this important aspect of preparedness by lending your voice and going to: http://www.unisdr.org/2013/iddr/ to learn more about how you can get the word out about this important aspect of community resilience.

https://www.thunderclap.it/projects/4931-disability-is-not-inability?locale=en

The Taxonomy of Decision Making

Over the weekend I questioned whether the steps being taken to prepare the Gulf Coast were overkill given the forecasted weakening of Tropical Storm Karen. It made me wonder how elected officials and those who fill the role of Emergency Manager work to maintain their position as a trusted voice in their community's without becoming the boy who cried wolf.

While the go/no go decisions are made by one person, the path that leads to the point of issuing a mandatory evacuation, or declaring a state of emergency, is one that needs buy in from stakeholders from various agencies who will play a role turning an order into action. Various municipal agencies need to be on board, the necessary resources available, and there needs to be money to cover immediate costs with reasonable assurances that it will be reimbursed at a later date. While the public only sees the press conference or gets a knock on their door, the steps that led to that point were set in motion long before.

To better understand the inner-workings of the connections that govern humanitarian activities, the Digital Humanitarian Network has created a matrix that illustrates a significant number of the positions involved in what is being dubbed the 'The Decision-makers Taxonomy':

http://embed.plnkr.co/aRKwZCO7Jk2kIveyWfuj/preview

As you can see it covers: Donors, The Private Sector, The Military, Individuals, NGO's, etc...go here for an interactive version this chart and you begin to get a sense of the layers of bureaucracy that exist from HQ to field level. After clicking through it's easier to understand why some things move slowly in the humanitarian world.

I believe this document is valuable not because of its ability to illustrate hierarchies, but because it provides a map. It gives people an understanding of who's out there, and unfortunately it doesn't include US-centric response structures: FEMA, DHS, State Emergency Management Agencies, NVOAD & State VOAD orgs, etc...

One of the biggest challenges in creating community resilience and bringing everyone onto the same page is having resources that illustrate how everything fits together. A matrix of this type begins to provide structure to the messy world of humanitarian response in a way that people can make sense of. A similarly US-focused resource could be used to map out players and help to provide an accurate landscape of the actors and their roles at the various levels in the disaster life cycle.

If any of you have resources, charts, etc... that would help demystify the Federal Family and the layers that exist, please leave a comment below. I think that having a US Response matrix of this nature would be a great tool in helping establish a common understanding of the response landscape, while bolstering resilience at a community level.

For those who want to learn more please go to: http://digitalhumanitarians.com/communities/decision-makers-needs

Resilient Infrastructure

During the government shutdown I mentioned that the Governor of Colorado has employed the National Guard to continue to restore critical infrastructure without the financial support of the federal government. The reason is that without these critical conduits, a number of communities in Colorado would remain cut off throughout the winter, exacerbating the damage done and potentially reframing the options families and municipalities have when they do get back to assess the damage. Frozen water will warp houses and blowout foundations-so the need for gaining access is critical to salvaging what's left in those communities.

And it got me thinking...when we talk about community preparedness, we don't talk about our nation's infrastructure which seemingly go hand-in-hand. Within the dept. of homeland security there is an entire office devoted to the protection of infrastructure but it's unclear (to me) who is responsible for it's maintenance and upkeep? Some Federal Agency? Is it the State's responsibility? And as I thought about it in the context of response and recovery, building in resilience and the issues of upkeep/maintenance are crucial.

But before we go further lets get on the same page as to what infrastructure is. My narrow-minded view limited infrastructure to: roads, bridges, and rail transport...but it turns out it, there's much more to it according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. Infrastructure ranges from: Aviation and Dams to Drinking Water, Energy, Hazardous Waste, Inland Waterways, Levees, Ports, and so much more.

To give you an idea of the enormity of the challenge associated with upkeep and maintenance, there are 600,000+ bridges in the US. and 1 in 9 of them is structurally deficient...and that's just bridges.

Given that we've defined infrastructure as basically everything that enables us to live the lives we're accustomed to--water from our faucets, goods in our stores, electricity at the ready, and schools to teach our children, how's all that infrastructure doing? Judging by recent history--not so good, remember The I-5 Skagit River Bridge Collapse in WA and the I-35W Mississippi Bridge Collapse? Of course that's only two events and bridge events at that, but when it comes to bridges...one is too many and given all the elements that makeup our infrastructure, any deficiency in one area will have an impact in others.

Since we've already determined that infrastructure is about much more than bridges, where do you go to better understand the current state of our infrastructure? You go to the Infrastructure Report Card put out by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Every 4 years the ASCE rates our infrastructure--this year, the US infrastructure received a D+ and the site above provides a very interactive way to why.

Regardless of whether you see the ASCE issuing this report as a massive conflict of interest or not, the fact remains that resilient infrastructure is an important building block to resilient communities. How will the Los Angeles Dept. of Water and Power, the utility overseeing the water infrastructure in Los Angeles, providing 3.9 million people drinking water through 11,000+kms of piping in a very seismically active area, deal with the service disruptions caused by the next big earthquake? Thinking through these types of scenarios and integrating innovation that will work to improve infrastructure resilience will ultimately deburden those responsible for its restoration during response/early recovery.

It's in our best interest to ensure that our "infrastructure" as broadly encompassing a word as it is, be as resilient and up to date as possible so that when they are tested by a disaster it can be up and running as quickly as possible and while we're making gains--we need to be doing better.

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/a/documents/2013-Report-Card.pdf

Disasters as a footnote in the conversation on Climate Change

Climate Reality Project

Yesterday I wrote about how the Social Good Summit's theme of #2030NOW is an opportunity to inform the direction of the Post-2015 Agenda, or life after the Millennium Development Goals. With that understanding, I eagerly awaited today to hear about how the concept of climate change and disasters would be woven into some of the panels and presentations, and more importantly, how it would be cemented in the bedrock of the charter from which the global development community would derive its strategic direction for the next 15 years.

Al Gore kicked off the climate change portion of the day with an impassioned call to arms around climate action and introduced presentations like: We're already paying the cost of Carbon, Today's Solutions Tomorrow's Future, and Millennials Leading the Way. While very interesting, I was ultimately disappointed that disasters were only talked about as an outcome of unchecked carbon emissions rather than a topic within the broader conversation with it's own panel/presentation. 

I know that I shouldn't be surprised by this given that it was Al Gore leading the afternoon, but I feel that it was short-sighted. For the purposes of today's discussion at the Social Good Summit, Climate Change and the solutions proposed were economically based. Provide incentives to business to reduce carbon emissions by levying taxes or a financial tariff and bam! bottom-line thinking that gets at the root of the problem in a language business can understand. Talking in those terms however does not address the secondary and tertiary issues that arise from the fact that disasters are increasing in frequency and intensity, and ultimately affecting millions of people across the world annually. 

There was no talk of creating more resilient communities better prepared to deal with the cycle of drought, flooding, and famine in Africa, nor how vulnerable populations are addressing the challenges of flooding in cities like Manila. And there was certainly no talk of innovative technological solutions addressing the lack of coordination within OCHA's cluster system, nor how emergent groups are giving early recovery a facelift thanks to innovative social technologies. When looking at disasters through the lens of carbon emission, you're not talking about how to address the ongoing impacts of this augmented climate reality all of us are living in. Of course addressing the root of the problem is critical, but the conversation can and should be about so much more.

There was a bright spot however, Maggie Fox, CEO of the Climate Reality Project talked about climate change in the context of current events, i.e. the flooding in Colorado. She contextualized the issue by talking about how the impacts of this new climate reality are already unfolding in communities across the world and left the door open to continue to broaden the conversation as we move towards 2015. 

I realize that this summit is about expanding how we approach the unfinished business of the MDGs with new tech and fresh ideas, but I also thought it was about expanding upon what was built 13 years ago to encompass the new reality we face, the progress made, and the challenges we've encountered.

Indonesian President Yudhoyono...aka: STUD

Feeling down because no one wanted to talk about disasters, I turned to my friend the internet and looked for hope and found it in Indonesia's President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. Hailed as the global champion for Disaster Risk Reduction, President Yudhoyono has mounted a crusade to ensure that the gains made in addressing the MDGs are not put in jeopardy due to the increasing risks natural disasters pose. The fact that there is an advocate championing this cause at some of the highest levels within the international development community, and one that represents a country with a deep appreciation for the impacts disasters can have on all aspects of community, gives me hope that the Post-2015 Agenda will have a broader approach to such an important issue.

The Road to Recovery

An area where I believe significant benefit can be derived that would aid in the mitigation of the groundhogs day scenario many communities face when responding to and recovering from disasters, is to spend time looking at how other communities faced similar events and then adapt and evolve what they did to suit the idiosyncrasies of their community.

In an effort to see what's being done along those lines, I've made an effort to get my hands on more articles coming from the world of academia, to broaden and challenge my views on what can and should be done to promote resilience at a local level. I can't remember how I stumbled upon this one, but it comes to us from the 'Lincoln Institute of Land Policy' and is titled "The Road to Recovery."

https://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/dl/2259_1598_The_Road_to_Recovery_0713LL.pdf

While any event adversely affecting individuals and families is unfortunate, it's good to know that there are people out there looking at and learning from previous disasters trying to find commonalities and lessons that can be shared. While it's good to know, I have a concern, with no disrespect to the good people at the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, who's reading articles of this nature outside of the academic community and socially challenged individuals like me? How are we broadening the circle of knowledge and experience when articles that examine and try to synthesize what's worked and what hasn't, exist in obscure publications that no one outside the academic circles have heard of?

I say this because what this article covers is important; it examines the role of the various levels of government in recovery and rebuilding trying to find commonalities in "disparate environments" to help the recovery of future communities impacted by similar disasters. At a quick 8 pages you can consider this bathroom reading...but it wasn't the length that struck me though, it was what was said about Collaboration:

Supporting Collaboration: Building sustainable capacity and capability for long-term recovery through genuine collaboration and coordination, both horizontally among local groups and vertically among different levels of government. Vertically organized, hierarchical agencies—with clear organizational charts and streamlined channels of communication—are usually not well suited to manage disaster recovery, because the lack of “connecting flow” across vertical hierarchies limits collaboration as well as the flow of new and updated information among organizations. U.S. National agencies involved in recovery, for example, are more adept at administering individual programs than they are at solving complex problems that cut across governmental institutional boundaries. By contrast, horizontally organized agencies can promote interagency coordination and information sharing, allowing individual groups to adapt to new contexts and information while remaining responsible to their parent organization. 

(Pg 18)

And...
The reason I was struck was because it's brutally honest and makes sense given what I've seen during the transition from response to recovery. How this plays out at a local level is that Long Term Recovery Committees (LTRCs) are the horizontally organized representative coalitions of local organizations described above tasked with solving the complex problem of Long Term Community Recovery.

Quick sidebar: Long Term Recovery Committees are coalitions of local organizations and agencies established to administer the long term recovery of a community, allocating dollars to individuals and families who go through the unmet needs / case management process while organizing the voluntary workforce to stretch recovery dollars. For more information on LTRCs go here.

So if LTRCs, these horizontally organized coalitions are the right tool for the job and the research reinforces it, why aren't more communities being educated and walked through the formation of an LTRC before the next event as a part of resilience programming?

When LTRCs are setup after a disaster there is often considerable turbulence due to: the stress of going through response, the amount of money they are responsible for, the politics and influence at play, the newness of the relationships of the constituent members, and the fact that a community is looking to them for guidance and direction on how best to quickly and effectively put the pieces back together.

By proactively addressing this, we would give communities time to deal with the many challenges that come with LTRC formation without the pressure of an ongoing response effort. This luxury would expedite the organization of how monetary donations are handled as well as work to fast track the start of case management and ultimately the work of repair and rebuild.

Don't get me wrong, creating an LTRC is no small feat, but if the upsides are so great and every community impacted by a disaster will need to form one, why isn't more being done?

LTRC Resources
Church World Service leads the way with free LTRC training, and as linked above, National VOAD has a manual that outlines the processes and best practices that come with forming an LTRC. In addition to the material resources available, there are countless communities that have gone through this with just as many individuals to tap for advice and guidance.

Lets start building the foundations required for each aspect of disaster response and recovery now so that when something happens this isn't a surprise, this isn't the first time people are meeting and hearing about LTRCs. This is the low hanging fruit with a potential for significant impact...proactive education is free, resources are available, and yet we see the groundhogs day scenario play out again and again making the road to recovery a long one.

Consensus on Clean up

One of the greatest assets individuals and communities can have before, during, and after a disaster is the knowledge of what happens next, and the confidence to act on that knowledge. Unfortunately, the current state of preparedness in many communities is far from that ideal and as a result, leaves room for ambiguity around key issues that mark turning points in an individual and community's recovery.

A great opportunity to clear up some of this ambiguity while working to set and manage homeowner expectations is to, as a response community, agree and adhere to standards around the work done on behalf of impacted homeowners i.e. mucking/gutting/debris removal/sanitizing/mold treatment/etc. By gaining consensus on this issue, standards can be proactively communicated as a part of preparedness initiatives to help bring both homeowner and responding groups (established or spontaneous) onto the same page when engaging in cleanup activities. Not only that, but by actively pushing cleanup standards, homeowners don't have to wait around for someone to help them, they can quickly and aggressively begin the process with friends, family, or spontaneous volunteers from the community and work to a standard that is applied across the country...in essence, working to create more resilient communities.

Is it done?

Is it Done?
I would bet that if you were to show the above photo to different people with different levels of experience in response, homeowners included, and asked what needed to happen next, you would get a variety of answers. Not to say that they would be wrong, but finding a definitive answer would not be an easy task because until recently no checklist existed, there was no "how to" guide endorsed by a coalition of organizations or FEMA to help define the process. Given that more than a handful of organizations have been doing this type of work for years spanning hundreds of disasters, one would think that an authoritative guidebook would've been written before now, if for no other reason than to give homeowners a chance at a full recovery without such reliance on response organizations. I say this because responding non-profits can't serve everyone, and after a certain point, they begin to pack up taking with them their know how and experience, leaving the remaining work to fewer and oftentimes less experienced resources. What remains is often a mash up of homes taken to various stages of "completeness," and a lot of grey area around how best to move many of them forward.

In recognition that the resources and surge of Volunteer power are not inexhaustible, the National VOAD Housing Committee has created guidelines to formalize an understanding of what completing the steps involved in clean up means. This was done to bring some uniformity to how we talk and act in the field on behalf of impacted homeowners and renters.

Go here for the download

While the creation of the above guidance documentation is a good start, I believe packaging these guidelines with documentation and other relevant resources should be used as a part of community preparedness programming; preparedness is about more than having food and water, it's about having the knowledge and understanding of what happens next. 

The goal is to ensure that all homeowners and responding groups have a clear understanding of expectations around what the different phases of cleanup are to mitigate the guesswork so that consistency can be created in the work done on behalf of impacted homeowners.

In the post, 'Disaster Response in the Digital Age' I talk about the need for the creation of a standardized data set so that information can flow freely between the proprietary software platforms being utilized during response. I believe the creation of this guidance document is an important first step, because without consensus around the definitions of cleanup activities, getting consistency in data collection and tracking, the first step in data set standardization, isn't feasible.

Disaster Response in the Digital Age

Have you ever seen a competition cooking show where each chef had to prepare a meal based on the same ingredients? The results are always diverse, utilizing different ingredients in ways unique to each Chef's background and training. While there isn't a TV showcasing the development taking place, we are experiencing something similar in disaster response, a renaissance if you will of application creation aimed at increasing efficiencies of response organizations active in disaster response and recovery.

This list represents a small fraction of the applications/companies with applications that have been created in response to the growing number of disasters and their impacts on communities. This list does not include the wealth of googledoc spreadsheets, excel files, or access databases that are created ad hoc to deal with the onslaught of information needing attention following an event.

Crisis Cleanup
GRT Mobile Solutions
Project SGE 2.0
Palantir
Jointly.us
CERTify (an app for CERT Team coordination)
ArcGIS
WebEOC
Help Me Help
GeoOp (used by the SVA after the Christchurch Earthquakes)
HelpBridge
Crisis mappers
Ushahidi
Google Crisis Maps
Needmapper
Ready QLD (Queensland, Australia's app)
Recovers.org

While the creation of tools to help communities work with the myriad of groups that aid in response and recovery is great, and certainly welcomed, there is a growing concern that we're progressing too fast and not approaching this in a thoughtful or strategic manner. Just because you can go to an all you can eat buffet doesn't mean that you have to eat until you vomit right? Well the same idea applies--just because we can create an unlimited number of apps that marry GIS,workflow, and damage assessment data, doesn't mean we should...without first putting some parameters around what it is we're trying to accomplish and how these tools can help advance an overall plan. As it stands it feels like each response organization is using and in some cases pushing a unique application which can lead to competition for the one app to rule them all.

We're Not Speaking the Same Language
A consistent issue brought up after events is the lack of access to real-time information, data that can be used to help inform the decision making process during response and recovery. Due to privacy issues, organizations on the ground are reluctant to share information with one another or anyone else for that matter until after they've left. This is a problem, but it doesn't encompass the whole problem. Even if groups were better about sharing information, it couldn't be done easily because the applications that are currently being used don't "speak the same language." There are multiple apps doing the same thing but because of the way they've been built, they can't share info, and given that collaboration and cooperation are the cornerstones of successful response--this inability to share is becoming a problem. Everyone is pushing for faster and more efficient, which is great, but rare is the instance where all responding groups are using the same technological platform to work from so those gains in efficiency are marred when trying to work together.

It's understood that timely information is key to promoting a coordinated response effort, what isn't understood is what information we're talking about. I believe that the wealth of apps created to help communities is great, I just want to ensure that all of the apps created can "talk" to one another so that information can be shared in real time...that way, an established response organization and spontaneous groups are working with the same data sets. Experience tells me that no platform is going to be used 100% of the time by 100% of the groups active in response, if we know that then we should be working to provide a framework so that whatever applications are being used can easily interface with everything else out there to aid in response activities.

Disaster Data-Standard
In essence what I'm talking about is the creation of a disaster data standard. Core data sets that can be the foundational elements of any application mobile or otherwise, think of it like a disaster API. If the foundation upon which all the apps are built is the same, then communication and the sharing of info should no longer be an issue. It turns out that I'm not the only on who's been thinking this way, Nethope, a tech focused nonprofit has spearheaded something called the Open Humanitarian Initiative, a broad-ranging effort with the goal of creating a unified data set that will aid in the delivery of disaster response in the information age. This presentation gives you a more detailed view of what their aim is:

Open Humanitarian Initiative - 2013 Plan from Gisli Olafsson

Technology is a tool, not a solution
In the midst of the conversation on the mass proliferation of technology and how it can impact disaster response, it's important to remember that technology is only as powerful as those who wield it, and that during times of crisis people tend to go with what's easiest and most comfortable. While the agencies responding may be well versed in the latest and greatest, if all disasters begin and end at the local level, it's important that those who will be there long after the National groups have left are comfortable with whatever system has been left for them, if they're not, a new system will be cobbled together and people will start over.

Access to reliably accurate and timely information is essential to gaining situational awareness following a disaster. When every responding organization holds a different piece of the puzzle to gaining situational awareness, efforts are hampered and gaining unity of effort becomes exceedingly difficult. But don't take my word for it, the former Minister of Science and Technology of South Africa said it much better in 2005 at the Southern African Telecommunications Networks and Applications Conference :

“The tsunami that devastated South Eastern Asian countries and the north-eastern parts of Africa, is perhaps the most graphic, albeit unfortunate, demonstration of the need for global collaboration, and open ICT* standards. The incalculable loss of life and damage to property was exacerbated by the fact that responding agencies and non-governmental groups were unable to share information vital to the rescue effort. Each was using different data and document formats. Relief was slowed, and coordination complicated.” 

*Information and Communications Technology 

and we're back...

While I wish I could say that I was doing something important, like hosting a meeting of the minds or presenting something groundbreaking to the UN, I can't...I stared at a wall for a few days. But I'm back, and if what the internet says is true (and when isn't it?) a lot has happened.

The Rockefeller's 100 Resilient cities challenge has launched their application process...there are a few rules as to who can enter but I encourage spreading this around as the more people who know the better. Urge your city council/mayor/manager/whomever to take a look and see how being awarded a grant of this nature could positively impact your community.

http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/100-resilient-cities-centennial 

In poking around, the site also has a some good articles around resiliency...often we get wrapped up our bubble's that we forget there's a big world out there struggling with similar issues in creating communities better able to handle the impacts of disasters.

Lots more to come but I wanted to say hello and share the announcement from Rockefeller in the hopes that some of you may be in a position to help your community in a significant way.

Articles from the Rockefeller site:

Building Resilient Cities: http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/building-resilient-cities

Resilience Begins at Home: http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/resilience-begins-home